Edwards hasn't lead in an Iowa poll since late August...

[SaveElmer]

Of the last 10 polls taken...

Hillary led in 7
Edwards led in 2
Obama in 1


Rasmussen 10/10 - 10/14 1007 LV 33 21 22 9 Clinton +11.0
Des Moines Register 10/01 - 10/03 399 LV 29 22 23 8 Clinton +6.0
American Res. Group 09/26 - 09/29 600 LV 30 24 19 10 Clinton +6.0
Newsweek 09/26 - 09/27 LV 24 28 22 10 Obama +4.0
Strategic Vision (R) 09/21 - 09/23 LV 24 21 22 13 Clinton +2.0
LA Times/Bloomberg 09/06 - 09/10 462 LV 28 19 23 10 Clinton +5.0
American Res. Group 08/26 - 08/29 600 LV 28 23 20 13 Clinton +5.0
Time 08/22 - 08/25 519 LV 24 22 29 11 Edwards +5.0
Strategic Vision (R) 08/17 - 08/19 600 LV 21 22 23 14 Edwards +1.0
Zogby 08/17 - 08/18 503 LV 30 19 23 10 Clinton +7.0

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/ia/iowa_democratic_caucus-208.html#polls

[UGADUer]

1. Those polls mean nothing to the suffering poor in America

Every election we are spammed with horse-race journalism about how people are doing at any one time in the polls, which reveal little to nothing about the actual election results or public preferences in policy -- they're mostly about public persona at one point in time and image.

God help the fools who created this mal-form of democracy in America.

[rinsd]

3. I consider myself a prolific poster but over 100 in 2 days?

Impressive..welcome to DU.

[UGADUer]

5. Yeah well I had a few topics where I had to debate

and so that was a lot of back and forth.

[saracat]

2. And considering he has spent "nothing' compared to the millions Hillary has had to spend, he isn't

doing badly at all. Just wait till the caucuses.There is a world of difference between a television ad generated candidate and the one the folks really care for. There is a reason folks like the SIEU unions support Edwards and not the alleged "frontrunner'.

[Yukari Yakumo]

7. Huh?

Edwards has essentially lived in Iowa since Dec. '04 prepping for another run. Suggesting he hasn't campaigned there as strongly as Clinton or Obama is laughable.

[saracat]

12. Edwards has spent only $24,000 dollars on avertising compared with

around 1.3 million each for Obama and Hillary. If one would read what I said I said he did not spend money on media.I said nothing about time spent in Iowa. Sheesh. He is not a "media" candidate as is Hillary.It is the commom everyday folks that are supporting Edwards.Like the SIEU but some consider that nothing like the media MSM Broadcast media.

[SaveElmer]

13. And who is supporting Hillary...

Are you saying 33% of Iowa Democrats are the "elite" ?

[durrrty libby]

15. from another thread

Hillary Clinton 33%
John Edwards 22%
Barack Obama 21%
Bill Richardson 9%
Joe Biden 4%
Other 2%



http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/democratic_iowa_caucus


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3619128

[saracat]

20. A combination of things . But the million plus ads have a lot to do with it.

[SaveElmer]

9. Spin city...

Hillary has spent half the time Edwards has in the state. Edwards has practically moved there for the last two years, and has visited all but one Iowa County...

Obama and Hillary much less...

He has significant support in the state, but it isn't growing...

And is in fact pretty stagnant while Obama and Hillary have caught up and seemingly passed him for now...

[Adelante]

17. More like five years altogether nt

[BlueStater]

4. Your point?

You guys are acting like schmucks the way you constantly belittle candidates who aren't leading. Knock it off.

[SaveElmer]

6. Exactly how did I belittle anybody?

Weird post...

[BlueStater]

8. The almost gleeful tone your posts have that Edwards and others are trailing Queen Hillary

That's what I'm talking about.

[SaveElmer]

10. Wait...so what you are saying is...

One should not be happy their candidate is in the lead...

And Hillary supporters should suppress that happiness because others don't like what the evidence currently shows?

And posting political news is somehow bad form on a political site?

Weird...

Sorry you don't like the results...but the problem is not my tone, it is the results

A little voice in my head tells me if whoever you are supporting were getting results like this you wouldn't be holding back...

[BlueStater]

14. The focus of your post isn't that Hillary is leading

But that Edwards is trailing. You're not supporting your own candidate but happily reporting another candidate is not leading. It's the kind of snarky additude I've come to expect of Hillary supporters on this forum.

[SaveElmer]

16. So again...

It is the results you don't like...

Gosh, let me go take a look at the voluminous number of Hillary bashing threads on here...certainly of a ruder caliber than mere snarkiness...and see what objections you lodged against those...

[BlueStater]

18. Like what threads in paticular?

If their posts attacking her appearance or anything like that then, no, I don't agree with or condone that.

That doesn't change the fact that your OP had a definite snark tone to it.

[SaveElmer]

19. And will I see the same objection from you...

Or do you only complain about threads of Hillary supporters...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3614157

A recent example

[MonkeyFunk]

11. And if somebody else were leading

and his supporters posted polls here, would you attack that? Or is it only Clinton supporters?